I don’t know if people have been following this Fatah Conference that has been going on. If you haven’t, that’s too bad, because the thing has been a totally entertaining trainwreck. Yesterday, it got even better.

In the latest installment of “We Couldn’t Make This Shit Up if We Tried”, Fatah (those oh-so-moderate peace lovers) are taking the position that “the return of both east and west Jerusalem to Palestinian control was a ‘red line’ which was non-negotiable, and would need to be fulfilled before any peace talks with Israel could renew.” This is just bizarre.

The “return” of (east and west) Jerusalem to “Palestinian control?” Jerusalem (east, west, north, south or whatever) has NEVER been under “Palestinian control” for even a second of human history. Since 1967, the entirety of Jerusalem has been under Israeli control. The western portion of the city has been under Israeli control since the end of the 1948 War of Independence. Before that, it was under British control through the Mandate. Before that, it was under Ottoman Turkish control (nobody mistakes them for “Palestinians) since roughly 1517, and Mamluk Turkish control from 1291-1517. Before 1291, it was ruled by the Christian Crusader Kingdom since 1099. The only period of Arab Muslim rule (NOT so-called “Palestinian” rule) over Jerusalem occurred from 636-1099, when the city was controlled by the Islamic Caliphate. Before that, you had the Byzantines, before that the Romans, and before that, THE JEWS.

Indeed, the western portion of Jerusalem didn’t even exist until well into the 20^th century and was wholly the result of Zionism. In terms of the history of Jerusalem as a whole, Jews represented a plurality of its citizens as far back as 1844, long before the Zionist movement began massive immigration of Jews to the Holy Land. As early as 1896, Jews were the majority of inhabitants of the city and have been so since then to this very day.

Despite the fact that all of this information is available on the website of Israel’s Foreign Ministry, Israel, for some odd reason, chooses not to deploy it. Instead, the response is simply that Fatah’s “declaration was a clear message to all those who maintained the ‘illusion that the Palestinians were prepared for compromise.’" But that’s not the right response at all. If the Arabs are right, and Jerusalem belongs to them, why should they give it up? Why should they compromise? That’s the message that the world hears and processes. The correct response is not “they won’t compromise.” It’s “they are liars. It’s ours, not theirs, and here’s why.”

And the stakes of making that case could not be higher. As Caroline Glick so eloquently argued (in a speech that is an absolute MUST-HEAR for anybody with even a passing interest in the Arab-Israeli conflict):

The Americans prefer to ignore the metaphysical and spiritual aspects of the city's frontline status as they push for an Israeli retreat to the indefensible 1949 armistice lines. For them, the issue of Jerusalem is no more than a petty real estate squabble. But our enemies know better. For them the question of who controls Jerusalem is rightly recognized as the core issue - as the issue upon which Israel rises or falls as a state and as a people. Earlier this month, this point was made clearly by one of Israel's sworn enemies. In a television interview on May 7, the PLO's Ambassador to Lebanon Abbas Zaki explained that from the PLO to the Iranian mullahs, Jerusalem is seen as the metaphysical key to Israel's wellbeing. As he put it,

"With the [implementation of the] two-state solution, [involving an Israeli relinquishment of Jerusalem], in my opinion, Israel will collapse, because if they get out of Jerusalem, what will become of all the talk about the Promised Land and the Chosen People? What will become of all the sacrifices they made - just to be told to leave? They consider Jerusalem to have a spiritual status. The Jews consider Judea and Samaria to be their historic dream. If the Jews leave those places, the Zionist idea will begin to collapse. It will regress of its own accord. Then we will move forward."

That is what is at stake, and that is why Israel must make the persuasive case that Jersualem belongs to the Jews, not to the Palestinians.